We'll need to do something about the wolves and we'll need more mild winters and continued reduction in antlerless tags if the northern deer herd is ever going to recover...
Seeing many does with twins and some nice older bucks again. Still not the high of a few years ago but improving.
Alos, check out the County map on closed roads. It might be some time before all the roads are opened due to the July 100 year storm. At least one of my areas remains closed unless I walk 4-5 miles on way.
It may have been buck only 25 years ago (I can't confirm or deny) and it is buck only now (unless you are a youth or disabled) but I do know that in the recent years prior to it just now becoming buck only the DNR waged war on the antlerless population with too many antlerless tags provided as well as T-Zone hunts and Earn-A-Buck forcing us to shoot does in order to "earn" our buck tags.
In my opinion that was total mismanagement by the DNR and they were out of touch and clueless as to the challenges from winter and wolves that the deer herd was already coping with.
Smokey,
In my opinion from my barstool, it was a combination of factors.
Yes, the 2 brutal back to back winters killed a lot of deer but it was not because they starved to death in crowded and over-browsed deer yards. I believe it was simply because the winter was so brutal that it was difficult for any deer to survive. I'm sure the brutal winters also had extreme negative affects on pregnant does.
The deer herds were already at extremely reduced levels due to too many antlerless tags and an out of control wolf population and along came the 2 brutal back to back winters. So many of the few remaining deer died.
Again, it's not like they died in overcrowded and over-browsed deer yards like they did in years past because there simply weren't enough deer left to overcrowd anything.
If the DNR would have factored in the wolf depredation and the fact that brutal winters are possible and then not killed off so many antlerless deer in the years prior there would have been more deer on the landscape and there would have been more deer left after the brutal winters.
Yes, maybe the brutal winters killed 50% of the deer but if there would have been more deer to start with the 50% that survived would have been a larger number and the herd wouldn't have such a deep population hole to try to climb out of.
The last two winters have been mild. We need a few more good years before we will see an increase in bucks over 4 years old.
Hard winters, no logging, way too many doe tags, and way too many predators. Sure wolves aren't the only factor. But they are a big current one that is keeping the herd down.
Also, myself and my friends who hunt/hunted there have noticed fluctuations in the deer herd following bad winters and we have also seen them bounce back after bad winters.
Over the past 10 years or so we have observed the steady decline of the deer herd and a steady increase in wolf numbers and failure on the part of the DNR to recognize the trend and limit antlerless tags until it was too late and the herd crashed.
Bad winters come and go and the deer have always bounced back but the decline caused by too many wolves and too many antlerless tags has been steady and there has been no bouncing back over the last 10 plus years, just steady decline.
Hopefully they are recovering now...
Wolves,bears and coyotes take a lot of deer in total no doubt. Add up that number and see how many it is locally.
An interesting thought: Many complain there is no season on wolves. a season that would reduce the wolf population and bring back the deer herd. Really? Why are those same people not out shooting coyotes?
More coyotes yes, but they don't affect the deer herd like a pack of wolves do. Bears are a huge issue. Lots of bears, and they are killer on spring fawns.
As for your initial question, a little less from over the winter with adult deer and a good spring fawn crop for now.
With the predator numbers, which go a long way towards managing the deer population (especially if it is already low), the deer density goal should be much higher than it is. The estimated wolf, bear, bobcat and coyote populations should have more to do with the deer density goals than the deer population itself.
If bear tags aren't going to be increased to manage the high bear population, and if the wolf population is not going to be managed, the deer density goals should be adjusted accordingly.
One of the arguments we hunters have against the anti-hunters is we harvest the biological surplus so the deer do not starve. Why let the deer starve when we can shoot them and utilize the meat?
We had many easy winters and the herd grew to large numbers and so did the predators with the growing orey numbers. More deer meant more impact on the food source. When the hard winters arrived some areas had less available food. Yes, some areas had a lot of food but the deer were unable to get to that food.
The high predator number will keep the herd from recovering as fast as it did when there were few predators. It is good to try to reduce those predators and good to not have antlerless tags in those years of recovery.
Road kills are up and trailcam pics look like improvement. I wish that we could place minerals in the off season so we could do better off season surveys.
I'm not sure what parts of Bayfield County you hunt but I have to respectfully and strongly disagree with your statement:
"But the herd was not way down before the hard years..."
In my experience and most of the guys I know who have hunted up there for years the herd was in serious trouble before the two bad back to back winters. In fact the deer herd up there had already been reduced to near unhuntable levels and the two brutal winters were simply the coup de grace which wiped out a large percentage of what remained.
I realize that the DNR currently has no power to control the wolf population but they should have realized that years ago and factored wolf depredation into the antlerless tag quota. If they would have done their due diligence and realized what was happening to the northern deer herd they would have reduced or eliminated antlerless tags years ago and not forced the asinine T-Zones and EAB seasons on us.
If it was my job to manage a resource and the resource nearly disappeared under my watch I would not expect to have a job anymore.
In regard to deer starving, in my opinion it has been many years since deer starved in Bayfield County for lack of food. Yes, some deer may have starved because the winter was so brutal that they couldn't get to any food but it wasn't because they were in an over-crowded over-browsed deer yard. That last bad winter was so brutal that a large percentage of deer were going to die regardless. If the DNR had reduced the northern deer herd down to only 2 deer remaining it's a very good chance that one or both of them would have died during that last brutal winter and it's certainly not because those 2 deer had exceeded the carrying capacity of the land.
On the other hand, if the DNR had not reduced the deer numbers so greatly then after the brutal winter killed half of the deer there would have been a lot more deer left. Half of 10,000 is a lot more than half of 2.
And again, the deer in the part of Bayfield County that I am familiar with currently have almost zero impact on habitat and food sources because the habitat and food sources are vastly greater than the deer numbers. The deer herd is a long long way from reaching the carrying capacity of the land.
I also strongly disagree with this statement that you made:
"But is we go too many easy years without antlerless tags we will be right back where we were two years ago."
That statement is based on the premise that there were too many deer two years ago. I'm not sure where you were two years ago, but there certainly was not a surplus of deer in northern Bayfield County two years ago. It sounds like we're talking about two different Bayfield Counties. Heck, 4 years ago the herd was in such bad shape that many guys had already given up. The thought that we should reinstate antlerless tags if the herd gets to the point where it was two years ago is extremely alarming.
I don't think antlerless tags are justified if the herd recovers to where it was even 10 years ago. In fact as long as there is an out of control un-managed wolf population and bad winters there should not be any antlerless tags; there simply is not nor will there ever be a surplus of deer on the northern landscape as long as the predators are not properly managed not to mention the possibility of the brutal winter wild card.
My point is that the issuing of antlerless tags is a management tool. With the current pressure put on by wolves (and other predators) and unpredictable winters there is no need to use antlerless tags as a management tool. Wolves and winters are taking care of the surplus, hunters don't need to shoot off the surplus.
I just wish that for once the DNR would error on the conservative side and let the deer herd grow instead of trying to shoot off every doe on the landscape. The northern landscape can definitely handle more deer. If a few more die during the winter it's not the end of the world. I'd rather error on the side of a few too many deer than always being on the short side. I think most hunters would agree.
And yes, I know it's not just the wolves; it's all predators, bad winters and too many antlerless tags. But which one of those factors can we control? Currently only one and that's the antlerless tag quota which should have been reduced and/or eliminated several years ago before the herd crashed.
Since no one can predict the winters it is hard to know when to stop antlerless shooting so that is the reason for establishing a level of CC. With the predators numbers and habitat changes it is necessary to look at that number from time to time. Maybe now with the County Deer Advisory Committees it is getting a better look.
Wallydog, sorry to get off topic. Good luck. One thing though is hunting the northwoods is an adventure, not easy but fun. Just don't plan on a hunt like the TV shows. Also since you will be out on the opener, bring your Thermacell.
